Earlier this month, the NASFAA membership was asked to comment on draft recommendations from NASFAA's Reauthorization Task Force (RTF) concerning the proposed Student Aid Rewards (STAR) Act and School-as-Lender (SAL) legislation. The membership response to these draft recommendations was intense and diverse.
We received over 250 responses. These responses were passionate, well crafted, and highly critical: critical of the proposed legislation; critical of the RTF draft recommendations; critical of NASFAA; and critical of colleagues who choose to operate under the opposing loan program.
The strong feelings voiced in the responses give the members of the RTF and the Board of Directors pause. Since the beginning of this Reauthorization of the HEA cycle NASFAA, as an organization, has and continues to maintain these positions:
First, to provide as much grant aid to students as possible. Second, to provide funds to the neediest students first. Third, to provide for fairness and equity across all Title IV programs and institutions as possible. Fourth, to maintain the existing loan programs so that students and schools have a choice.
Those positions have not altered.
Throughout the reauthorization process, legislation on many topics will be proposed and vetted by the community, as well as the congressional leadership. Those with strong opinions will jump into the fray early to try to persuade others that theirs is the right path to follow. Some of the legislation proposes great ideas, but dies on the shelf due to timing. Some good legislation sees the light of day, but is scaled back due to budget constraints. Some legislation contains a great idea, but the nature of the bill is not appropriate for the audience it's meant to serve. There will be many discussions on other bills before this Reauthorization is complete.
STAR and SAL are just two bills, two bills that may contain great concepts, but may need more study before one organization or another can support them.
Due to the nature of these proposed bills, and the effect that they may have on how institutions choose to operate, the NASFAA Board has asked the RTF to further study the nuances of these proposals. This study will include an in-depth review of the membership's responses to identify themes of concern, as well as support. In addition, budget-scoring reports will be reviewed to determine program costs. The RTF also has been asked to determine if there are other areas within the Title IV programs where savings may be identified and rerouted towards need-based grants for students.
The RTF will report back to the NASFAA Board of Directors with its recommendations at its July meeting in New York City.
By Laurie Wolf, Chair, NASFAA Reauthorization Task Force
With Marty Guthrie and Larry Zaglaniczny, NASFAA Staff
Posted May 25, 2005 on www.NASFAA.org, the Web Site of the
National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators (NASFAA).
Copyright 2005. Redistribution to non-NASFAA institutions is prohibited
Please submit Web Site questions or comments to web@nasfaa.org
